Hussey v. Deep Meadow Corr

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6990 DAVID HOWARD HUSSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus DEEP MEADOW CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Dentist Of- fice; LIEUTENANT BROOKS; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER GEE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (CA-99-1118-2) Submitted: November 4, 1999 Decided: November 10, 1999 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Howard Hussey, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: David Howard Hussey appeals the district court’s order dis- missing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. The dis- trict court properly required exhaustion of administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1997e(a) (West Supp. 1999). Because Appellant did not demonstrate to the district court that he had exhausted administrative remedies or that such remedies were not available, the court’s dismissal of the action, without prejudice, was not an abuse of discretion. Further, although Hussey asserts that he filed a grievance while this appeal was pending, there is no evi- dence to suggest that he appealed the denial of that grievance to the regional administrator. Because Hussey has not exhausted his administrative remedies, we therefore affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2